Jump to content
The Education Forum

John Lattimer: "I wish to reemphasize that none of our test objects in these experiments ever jumped or fell off the stand AWAY from the shooter"


Recommended Posts

"The calculations show that no bullet of reasonable size can possibly throw a person in any direction.

Calculations done with sliding rule ... With lots of wrong assumptions. LMAO.

I posted 5 YouTube videos at the top of the thread. In all of them the target is pushed/knocked over in the direction of the bullet. Unfortunately, only the first one was a direct hit in the sweet spot and the bad guy was blasted away. Went airborne. Had it been JFK, the corpse would have ended outside the limo, on the pavement. See that video below.

3 other bullets barely touched the top of head. The Colombian criminal has hit in the jaw. Not the best specimen. I have shown in the "Parkland Effect" that you need a Perfect Storm alignment in order to achieve lift-off at Cape Canaveral. Will repost it.

I have a book with calculations that say that a 6.5mm M/C could not make JFK's head move that fast BUT a Winchester could.

-Ramon

========================================

Sniper Shot Barret M107

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaFprrcs7jo

Fast forward to minute 4:15"

that's neat, that book. I have a gun that says those calculations are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

BTW, the Edgewood Arsenal "Wound Ballistics Of 6.5-mm. Mannlicher-Carcano Ammunition" report is very interesting reading too. More conspiracy theorists should look at it. Here it is:

http://MaryFerrell.org/documentID=62296

Every single test performed between April 1964 and October 1964 by Dr. Olivier and Dr. Dziemian at Edgewood Arsenal is consistent with the Warren Commission's ultimate conclusions. For example:

Per the Edgewood Arsenal ballistics tests with Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle, that exact rifle was capable of causing all of the wounds that were inflicted on President Kennedy and Governor Connally in Dallas on November 22, 1963.

Quoting from the Edgewood report:

"Experiments were performed with the 6.5-mm Mannlicher-Carcano assassination rifle, serial no. C2766, and 6.5-mm Western Cartridge Company, lot WCC 6000, Mannlicher-Carcano ball ammunition to reproduce the conditions occurring at the time of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on 22 November 1963. The results indicated that the wounds sustained by the President and by Governor Connally, including the massive head wound of the President, could be produced by the above type of bullet and rifle."

-------------------------------

And Dr. Lattimer's experiments produced results very similar to those of Olivier's 1964 tests.

Quoting Lattimer:

  • "Combinations of human skull tops and melons were tested, and, again, all fell backward off the stand toward the shooter. No melon or skull combination ever fell AWAY from the shooter. Human skulls were then packed with solid melon contents and taped and sewed tightly together with strong tape and thread to simulate the scalp. We fired into these at the same point and at the same angle as the President was struck. The skull wounds produced were strikingly similar to Kennedy's [see illustration below]. Again, the skulls fell or jumped off the stand toward the shooter, and large fragments of the top of the skulls flew upward and forward for distances of forty feet or more, just as fragments of Kennedy's skull can be seen to have done in frames 313 through 318 of the Zapruder movie." -- John K. Lattimer; Page 251 of "Kennedy And Lincoln"

FromJohnLattimersBook--Head-ShotCom.jpg

Read the report but don't swallow its conclusions, David. I discussed Olivier's tests in my single-bullet theory presentation at Bethesda. At was at this point, as I recall, that Burt Griffin jerked up and essentially ran from the room.

Read about the wrist wound. They concluded the bullet barely grazed the bone, and lost minimal velocity (but 82 fps) in the wrist. Well, they also concluded the bullet was barely moving when it hit the thigh. This means the bullet was only traveling a few hundred fps upon leaving Connally's chest. Now read the part about simulating Connally's chest wound. Here, yet again, they noted that the damage to Connally was less than would be expected for a high-velocity bullet and concluded the bullet lost minimal velocity--about 400 fps--in the chest. Well, heck, this means the bullet striking Connally was traveling around 700 fps.

Hmmm... The bullet was traveling more than 1900 fps before hitting Kennedy, and only 700 fps or so upon hitting Connally. And yet it was purported to have--once again--lost minimal velocity in Kennedy's neck, around 132 fps. So, yeah, the numbers didn't add up. Every test regarding the single-bullet theory ran by Olivier suggested the bullet or bullets striking Kennedy and Connally were traveling at a low velocity. Based upon his tests, the single-bullet theory only made sense if the bullet was traveling at a subsonic velocity.

Was it just a coincidence, then, that when Sturdivan testified before the HSCA regarding the wound ballistics of a subsonic bullet, his testimony was changed to reflect a bullet traveling 880 mps, instead of 800 fps?

And was it just a coincidence, then, that when Sturdivan pushed out his book purportedly defending these tests, he fudged the numbers, whereby the bullet Olivier claimed lost 400 fps in Connally's chest was now purported to have lost 1,180 to 1,480 fps in his chest, and the bullet Olivier claimed lost 82 fps in Connally's wrist was now purported to have lost 245-485 fps in his wrist?

And was it just a coincidence, then, that while Sturdivan had told the HSCA the bullet was traveling 1,600 to 1,700 upon impact with Connally's back, and that it would deform on bone at 1,000 fps when traveling sideways, he switched these numbers around for his book, and now claimed the bullet was traveling 1,780 to 1,880 upon impact with Connally's back, and that it would deform on bone at 1,400 fps when traveling sideways, but that this wasn't inconsistent with the single-bullet theory--because the bullet had lost as much as 530 fps after entering Connally's back, but before striking his rib? (The blatant dishonesty of this position is perhaps best demonstrated by Sturdivan's simultaneous claim the bullet striking Kennedy lost no more than 205 fps while traveling through 5 inches of Kennedy's neck.)

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Pat, I've always thought the velocity estimates in Larry Sturdivan's book seemed a bit on the low side for Connally's wounds. But, unlike Sturdivan, I'm not an expert in wound ballistics.

However, with or without relying on anything uttered by Larry M. Sturdivan, the Single-Bullet Theory is by far the most logical and reasonable conclusion to reach regarding the wounding at circa Z224 of President Kennedy and Governor Connally. No other theory comes even remotely close to the SBT. And there's certainly no physical evidence that a second (separate) bullet struck John Connally at all.

Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Pat, I've always thought the velocity estimates in Larry Sturdivan's book seemed a bit on the low side for Connally's wounds. But, unlike Sturdivan, I'm not an expert in wound ballistics.

However, with or without relying on anything uttered by Larry M. Sturdivan, the Single-Bullet Theory is by far the most logical and reasonable conclusion to reach regarding the wounding at circa Z224 of President Kennedy and Governor Connally. No other theory comes even remotely close to the SBT. And there's certainly no physical evidence that a second (separate) bullet struck John Connally at all.

Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

Well, wait a second. Have you reversed yourself? You just claimed Olivier's tests supported the Warren Commission's conclusions, including the single-bullet theory. Are you now willing to concede that his tests in fact make a strong argument against the theory? And that his (loss of) velocity estimates were way off?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know WHOSE velocity estimates are off, Pat. But ALL of the various estimates for the bullet velocities obviously cannot be 100% accurate. They're all over the map.

But we also know that a bullet travelling at 1100 feet per second can break a human wrist bone and emerge in perfect condition. Dr. Martin Fackler proved that in 1992 at the ABA mock trial. Fackler's test bullet is below. Was Fackler a l-i-a-r too, Pat? ....

Fackler-Bullet.jpg

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know WHOSE velocity estimates are off, Pat. But ALL of the various estimates for the bullet velocities obviously cannot be 100% accurate. They're all over the map.

But we also know that a bullet travelling at 1100 feet per second can break a human wrist bone and emerge in perfect condition. Dr. Martin Fackler proved that in 1992 at the ABA mock trial. Fackler's test bullet is below. Was Fackler a l-i-a-r too, Pat? ....

Fackler-Bullet.jpg

If I recall, this was the only point on which Fackler testified. He said that a sufficiently reduced velocity bullet COULD break a wrist bone and suffer minimal or no damage. He failed to claim that a fully-loaded Carcano bullet causing Kennedy and Connally's wounds would be traveling at such a velocity, moreover. And he also failed to explain why a bullet injuring Connally's wrist--to the minor extent it was injured--would barely break the skin on his thigh.

As demonstrated in my last post, there is 1,000 fps or so that needs to disappear from the bullet in order for Connally's wounds to make sense. Sturdivan simply added it onto the other wounds. It's not clear what Fackler would have done had he been asked to explain the travels of the bullet, step by step. But you can bet he'd have ended disregarding Olivier's tests, much as Sturdivan.

The 82 fps lost in the wrist is the main problem. For the bullet to have lost more, the wrist would have to have suffered more damage. So, yes, one way of getting around this is to propose that the bullet was traveling at a greatly reduced velocity upon striking the wrist. But then one runs into all sorts of problems surrounding the speed at which the bullet will deform on bone. That is why Sturdivan fudged his numbers and pretended the bullet lost more upon striking Connally's back before it hit the rib than while traveling all the way through Kennedy's neck.

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Pat, what do YOU think happened---if not the SBT?

Do you think TWO separate bullets (or maybe three) struck JFK and Connally? (Silly question, I know. If you don't believe in the SBT, you OF COURSE think at least 2 bullets hit the men.)

If so, why didn't the bullet that exited Kennedy's throat hit the limo and cause some seat or upholstery damage?

Or was JFK's throat wound an entry wound?

If so, how could both bullets that struck Kennedy's back and neck just vanish? And why would TWO bullets only penetrate JFK's body such a short distance and cause very minimal damage in his body?

And did merely a bullet fragment hit Connally's thigh, versus a slowed-down CE399?

And what is John Connally doing in this Z-Film clip, if he's NOT reacting to the bullet that just hit him in the back?....

Z-Film+Clip-SBT-In-Motion.gif

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

And what is John Connally doing in this Z-Film clip, if he's NOT reacting to the bullet that just hit him in the back?....

Z-FilmClipSBTInMotion3.gif

well, he and the rest in the clip are rotating around the film plane's *y axis for starters. Can you explain that?

And Connely's left shoulder, why has it grown over 3-4 frames? If not shoulder growth perhaps a shadow? If so, what is creating that shadow that appears cast on Jackie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your requirement is to make a frontal shot indistinguishable from a rear one, you do not pick bullets with extra punch.

-RFH

who said anything about any such requirement? i'm not aware of any theory in existence that posits this degree of planning.

The plotters were The Best, most qualified people in the world. Their skills were only matched by their Soviet counterparts.

The mentioned theory has been around for years, known as the Herrera Tangential Shot Hypothesis.

-Ramon

This is from the new movie (only shown once in the Texas Theater, Dallas, plus in Europe)

http://acoupincamelot.com/trailer.html

2-Trajectories.png

A fundamental requirement was that the shot had to be like those reversible pants:

Tangential-Shot-Symmetric.png

Edited by Ramon F. Herrera
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Z-FilmClipSBTInMotion3.gif

And Connely's [sic] left shoulder, why has it grown over 3-4 frames? If not shoulder growth[,] perhaps a shadow? If so, what is creating that shadow that appears cast on Jackie[?]

He's flinching his shoulders, David.

That's kinda the whole point. (Duh.)

Governor Connally is involuntarily reacting to having just been shot.

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

HEAD SHOT: THE SCIENCE BEHIND THE JFK ASSASSINATION by G. Paul Chambers

Chapter 9: The Second Rifle in Dealey Plaza

"Science is the ultimate test of truth. Lies and hypocrisy don't live long in the arena of modern scientific inquiry. It is fitting that the space program that Kennedy championed should ultimately provide the methodology for resolving the riddle of his death: the physics of rocket science (*). With the identity of the murder weapon and the origin of the fatal shot established, the chances of unraveling the tangled threads of the Kennedy assassination, the Gordian knot of murder mysteries, increase exponentially. The law of nature is Alexander's sword."

Head-Shot-Cover.png

http://patriot.net/~ramon/jfk/Head-Shot-Ch-9.pdf

(*) More specifically, the Finite Element Method and Computational Fluid Dynamics. Together, they form part of Multiphysics.

-Ramon

Edited by Ramon F. Herrera
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Z-FilmClipSBTInMotion3.gif

And Connely's [sic] left shoulder, why has it grown over 3-4 frames? If not shoulder growth[,] perhaps a shadow? If so, what is creating that shadow that appears cast on Jackie[?]

He's flinching his shoulders, David.

That's kinda the whole point. (Duh.)

Governor Connally is involuntarily reacting to having just been shot.

In that case , he is flinching rather too late to have been hit by the same bullet that JFK had already reacted to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David,

Are you claiming that the Penn & Teller spot:

A) was unedited

B the weapon is the same as model configured the same way as our favorite carcano

C) that the dry fire depicted someone aiming at a moving target

D) any part of this wasn't shameful over-simplification

E) the little pink hat on the melon on the right was in good taste?

Edited by Chris Newton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris,

I'm just saying that the Penn & Teller clip essentially proves (to my satisfaction) that a "jet effect" can occur when a melon is hit with a rifle bullet.

To answer your questions specifically....

A. I have no reason to believe the "jet effect" portion of the video was edited in order to fool anybody. Do you have reason to believe it was?

B. It was a Carcano. Not Oswald's exact rifle, of course. So if you want to throw out the 3.45-second dry-firing demonstration, go ahead. But this point is immaterial when it comes to the "jet effect" experiment.

C. No. But Oswald's target (Kennedy's head) was essentially a still target too (from LHO's POV on the sixth floor). Very little lateral movement of the target at all. The shots were easy ones. Only CTers disagree (of course).

D. It was simplified, yes. But "shameful"? Well....not very much. :) The video proved the points it was attempting to prove.

E. The pink hat didn't offend me. Were you offended by it?

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glenn Nall @ post #44

Your conceptual analysis is correct according the law of Conservation of Energy, the most fundamental law of physics. Which states that the total energy of a "closed system" (for example, a system consisting of a rifle bullet, the air through which it travels, the head it strikes, the body to which the head is attached, the car seat on which the body rests) is constant at all times; the total energy neither increases nor decreases. This is a deep principle, which underlies all engineering.

We know from Conservation of Energy that the kinetic energy of the bullet that strikes JFK's head is conserved; none of this kinetic energy is "lost." This is true whether the bullet is jacketed and does not break apart in the skull or whether, as Robert Prudhomme argues, the bullet was frangible and broke apart in the skull.

If the bullet did not exit the skull, all of the bullet's kinetic energy was transferred initially to the skull. What became of this energy? Some of it was transferred as kinetic energy of bone, scalp, hair, and brain matter that the bullet or its fragments blasted into motion. Some of the kinetic energy was absorbed by muscles supporting the head; this energy was converted to electrical energy within the muscles and dissipated as heat (a form of energy).

If the bullet exited the skull, its kinetic energy as it exited was transferred to something else. If an intact bullet exited through the right top of JFK's skull, the kinetic energy of the bullet as it exited the skull was imparted somewhat to the air through which it traveled until it hit, say, the dashboard of the presidential limo; thereupon it transferred its remaining kinetic energy to the dashboard, mostly as heat energy.

Kinetic energy, all energy in fact, is a vector quantity, meaning it has values in the x, y, and z directions.

Luiz Alvarez, a paid stooge, treated the jet effect, which is real, as being the dominant absorbent of the bullet's kinetic energy. He was a xxxx. Like Dartmouth's Farid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...